SHILLONG, India, March 23 -- Meghalaya High Court issued the following judgment on Feb. 20:
1. As the interim order for stay of the transfer has since been vacated, nothing substantial remains for consideration, however Mr. B. Deb, learned counsel for the petitioner has strenuously argued that the entire transfer episode was actuated by the actions of the respondent No. 5, to which a reply is necessary. He further submits that the alternative prayer is for direction to the respondent No. 2, to dispose of the representation dated 27.09.2025, wherein the allegations have been made against the respondent No. 5.
2. Dr. N. Mozika, learned DSGI assisted by Ms. M. Myrchiang, learned counsel for the respondents submits that nothing remains for consideration and the matter may be closed at this stage itself.
3. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and also considering the fact that the interim order has since been vacated, but however as the representation dated 27.09.2025, still remains unattended as submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner, for the ends of justice it is directed that the representation be disposed of within a period of 2(two) months.
4. As ordered above, the matter accordingly stands closed and disposed of.
Disclaimer: Curated by HT Syndication.
